[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6310561,"mediaKeyId","2400317-b548db5703e86939bebf2ef646cc1702","parentId",2400317,"title","Pacifica continues short‑term rentals ordinance hearing after hours of public comment; debate centers on caps, parking and platform accountability","audioSeconds",7820,"startMs",5575000,"endMs",13395000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2400317-b548db5703e86939bebf2ef646cc1702&start=5575&end=13395","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2400317-b548db5703e86939bebf2ef646cc1702/thumbnail_5575000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6310561/Pacifica/San-Mateo-County/California/Pacifica-continues-shortterm-rentals-ordinance-hearing-after-hours-of-public-comment-debate-centers-on-caps-parking-and-platform-accountability","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6310561-aac1d492697d8008007fd7412fc81a76/orig.mp4?Expires=1771201173&Signature=Fo8Ua0LCznCtcHiU1Kh2LdqItntyd1eED46uqjS3uR1X5e0qowTiX7vpvGlh9ewaMrj6-6C1-nfdEAikr7aJ~jgsF-FUlcVAsQpmQ45Fg3~nEq8mPnnghw~Jh-qKeFGyxcK2FIf-r6NyNpbEkwSLUzay044huslhB2GRy6kPuogmIN5Pi3INYM3e7TkpK-mqR~IIbcxvQI9NFzBeU6~Poc4P2L7V1fZz~W8iV7LE2Bq20N6nnnzSDXmL2JCJ1lbBEcJxdEi7yac8Dyz7ROyyTqamoJ-Ut-SaCFzKrQIXJWKZOD2KdNwSQFKTUUzYtKVv2TXpAGVn3xk7Sbbp42vZYA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Pacifica CA","date","2025-02-26T16:59:11Z","article","The Pacifica City Council conducted a lengthy public hearing Feb. 24 on a proposed ordinance to repeal and replace Article 49 (short‑term rentals) of the municipal code and to add operational standards. Community Development Director Samantha Updegrave presented the draft and outlined a series of changes staff and the planning commission recommended; council heard roughly two dozen public commenters before continuing the hearing to a later date.

The proposal and why it matters
Staff said the draft would require that most short‑term rentals be in a primary residence, prohibit unhosted STRs in multifamily buildings, require permit numbers on advertising listings, require a locally available responsible party, limit visitors and outdoor pool/spa hours, and add parking and occupancy rules. Because the Coastal Zone requires local coastal program (LCP) certification, some provisions would take effect in the coastal zone only after the California Coastal Commission certifies the city's LCP amendment.

Key technical points staff presented
- Citywide baseline: staff said 139 tax‑compliant STRs were active when the review began. They estimated that 73 existing units would not qualify for renewal under the new rules; an additional 20–30 could be removed after on‑site inspection.
- Fiscal impact: staff reported a modeled annual revenue loss of roughly $1.4–$1.5 million if the stricter draft were applied citywide; for the current fiscal year the noncoastal prorated loss was estimated at about $580,000 and $775,000 for the next full year under certain assumptions.
- Enforcement and timing: staff told council that some ordinance changes would apply immediately on adoption (permit and record‑keeping rules) while operational requirements (occupancy limits, pool restrictions, amplified sound bans) would take effect for a given property when that property’s permit next comes up for renewal, termination or revocation. Coastal‑zone changes are contingent on Coastal Commission certification and may take substantially longer.

Main points from public comment
More than two dozen residents and hosts addressed council. Commenters who urged tighter limits and stronger enforcement said: unhosted STRs reduce long‑term rental supply, cause neighborhood noise and parking impacts, and harm school enrollment and community character. Speakers called for a 60‑night cap for unhosted rentals (rather than 90), equal parking standards across coastal and noncoastal zones, platform accountability (requiring listing platforms to de‑list noncompliant units), local responsible parties who can respond in person, and immediate enforcement of nuisance provisions.

Operators and property owners argued stricter rules would eliminate lawful local income for residents and reduce tourist revenue for local businesses: some hosts described screening, local neighbor outreach and donated stays for community fundraisers. Several residents urged inspections and safety checks (detectors, egress windows, pool fencing) for both hosted and unhosted units, at operator expense.

Council action and votes at the meeting
- Motion to extend the meeting to 11:30 p.m. passed 4–1 (Council member Wright opposed).
- Council continued the public hearing to a date uncertain so staff can return with any requested revisions; the continuation vote passed unanimously.
- Other procedural items: the consent calendar was approved earlier in the meeting (unanimous).

What remains unresolved
Council members and staff asked for more detail on platform accountability and the fiscal model; staff said a more comprehensive economic study was not requested at this time. Council asked staff to return with clarified language and fiscal detail; council also asked for clarification about permit inspection scope and about how the ordinance would be enforced immediately versus at permit renewal.

Next steps
The council left the hearing open; staff will return with revised language and implementation options. Because several proposed provisions would require Coastal Commission review for the coastal zone, full implementation would be staged and could take more than a year for coastal properties. Council asked for clearer definitions of operator/responsible party, residency verification procedures, inspection scope and costs, and options for platform accountability.

Ending
The council did not adopt the ordinance; deliberations will continue after staff returns with the requested clarifications to the draft and estimates of fiscal and enforcement impacts.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","PCC 2/24/25 Part 2 - Pacifica City Council Meeting - February 24, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Pacifica’s City Council opened a public hearing Feb. 24 on a proposed rewrite of its short‑term rental rules but continued the hearing after several hours of public testimony. Staff presented a draft that would require primary‑residence status for most STRs, add occupancy and parking rules, require permit numbers on listings and create local enforcement tools.","taxTitle","Pacifica, San Mateo County, California","taxId",54263,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6310566,"Pacifica council green-lights consultant to finish Climate Action and Adaptation Plan; defers priority ranking to implementation body",6210,0,6210000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2400317-b548db5703e86939bebf2ef646cc1702&start=0&end=6210","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2400317-b548db5703e86939bebf2ef646cc1702/thumbnail_0.jpg","/articles/6310566/Pacifica/San-Mateo-County/California/Pacifica-council-green-lights-consultant-to-finish-Climate-Action-and-Adaptation-Plan-defers-priority-ranking-to-implementation-body","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6310566-d1eb59571ff6834e74749003f61afddf/orig.mp4?Expires=1771201173&Signature=hgzWfG3H-ucRceGgPSYs6PmpdLrAHH5SliNm2oSHT3R9UQINj9pVNdGgeRudLDlb0hsEmGFrh0--Uaescq6TnOB2vyUoDJCwCZMhOzoSHaXLCS4XejQ3erRAnbNPKL5Uxm4eX0eQlB39bEpVVsnpwpIx1LGTu19E805F~txJemxlw4zgurmbYobJhS0vDRPN1C0OrhHSASKgyhkVlMkBT657DtJJ20Mv-LsO9or0Ri4YgXt0tjfu6uUaZ~hdoK5-Dt7yO0dvuD-wRH9zs7DUKa2lvKQClBlV-vFpsfKiAYFphV-kfaOfu5UME3AISh6czCr8wqVYxTRfwNbAConEkA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Pacifica City Council on Feb. 24 signaled support for hiring outside consultant help to complete the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAP), after hearing the task force present a draft of five years of recommended actions across sectors including energy, transportation, food/consumption and resilience.

The council’s majority supported using consultant time to finalize greenhouse‑gas numbers and tidy the draft document for adoption. Council members also said they preferred leaving a final prioritization of the plan’s many actions to the implementation phase — through a recommended environmental commission and a staff sustainability coordinator — rather than ordering a consultant-driven three‑tier ranking before adoption.

Why it matters: The CAP lays out dozens of near-, medium- and long-term changes the city could take to reduce emissions and increase resilience. Council direction on funding and implementation affects staffing, fiscal planning and the city’s ability to pursue state and federal grants that often require “shovel ready” components.

What council acted on and why
The task force described the draft as a five‑year menu of actions developed by subcommittees and community outreach. Staff and task‑force members framed immediate items (Tier 1) as having high greenhouse‑gas reduction potential, alignment with existing city goals and existing or secured funding; Tier 2 items as requiring new resources; and Tier 3 items as requiring policy changes or regional coordination.

City Manager Kevin Woodhouse asked council to confirm two items: whether to hire consultant help to ‘‘push the CAP over the finish line’’ and whether the council wanted staff or the consultant to apply a formal prioritization framework before adoption. Multiple council members said yes to consultant support and said they preferred to leave prioritization for the proposed environmental commission and staff to manage during implementation rather than imposing an up‑front ranked tiering now.

What task‑force presenters said
Presenters recommended immediate work with Peninsula Clean Energy to boost household electrification outreach and increase participation in utility programs. Task‑force outreach chairs described public engagement at local events and surveys, and recommended a permanent environmental commission plus a city sustainability coordinator to carry the plan forward and maintain a resource website for residents.

Participants flagged equity and cost concerns: members asked how heat‑pump retrofits would affect fixed‑income seniors; task‑force presenters replied that Peninsula Clean Energy and income‑qualified programs, zero‑interest loans and rebates could mitigate costs. The draft notes buildings account for over 40% of Pacifica’s greenhouse‑gas emissions and highlights methane from gas appliances as an air‑quality and short‑term climate issue.

Numbers and implementation details cited
- Draft plan: five‑year action list, with sectoral subcommittees.
- Peninsula Clean Energy participation cited at roughly 98% participation for customers; presenters urged increased outreach to approach full participation.
- Electric‑vehicle charging projections cited by consultants: an earlier estimate of 500 chargers by 2045 was revised by Rincon to roughly 900 by 2035 and 1,800 by 2045 to accommodate expected adoption.
- Staffing and budget examples discussed: CivicSpark fellowship (11 months) previously cost the city roughly $30,000; current part‑time staff budget figure for an implementation aide was cited at about $45,000 for the fiscal year.

Public comment and partners
Public commenters and community groups urged adoption of the plan and supported an urban tree‑canopy goal in the resilience section. The Pacifica Land Trust announced a state Coastal Conservancy grant to study nature‑based coastal resilience opportunities and asked the city to coordinate that work with the CAP.

Next steps
Council members gave majority direction to engage consultant support to complete technical final edits and greenhouse‑gas accounting. They also asked staff to return with implementation details and options for forming an environmental commission and a sustainability coordinator position; the council did not adopt final prioritization tiers at this meeting and expects implementation planning to guide near‑term project selection.

Ending note
Task‑force members stressed the draft is intended to be a living document: the group proposed regular updates, continued public engagement, and a city role in maintaining an accessible resource hub for residents seeking electrification and resilience programs.","The Pacifica City Council on Feb. 24 signaled support for hiring a consultant to complete the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan but declined to require an immediate, consultant‑prepared prioritization of the draft actions, preferring implementation and prioritization to be handled by a proposed environmental commission and staff.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Pacifica continues short‑term rentals ordinance hearing after hours of public comment; debate centers on caps, parking and platform accountability

Pacifica council green-lights consultant to finish Climate Action and Adaptation Plan; defers priority ranking to implementation body